Lotus Sutra

VoidWhereProhibited

A link on Zen and the Lotus Sutra entitled

Zen & the Lotus Sutra
A Series of Seminars at the
Berkeley Zen Center ~ 1999
by Ryuei Michael McCormick

http://nichirenscoffeehouse.net/Ryuei/Zen-LS-1.html

Near the beginning of the link you can find this quotation from Dogen, founder of the Japanese Soto Zen tradition, concerning the Lotus Sutra:

The Saddharma-pundarika-sutra explains the purpose of the various Buddhas having appeared in this world. It may be said to be the great king and the great master of all the various sutras that the Buddha Shakyamuni taught. Compared with this sutra, all the other sutras are merely its servants, its relatives, for it alone expounds the Truth. The other sutras, on the other hand, include provisional teachings of the Buddha, and therefore do not express his real intention. It is a mistake to use the teachings of the other sutras as the basis for determining the validity of those contained in the Saddharma-pundarika-sutra, for without the merit-power of the latter, the former would be valueless. All the other sutras find their origin in this sutra.

Glad to see Nichiren-Shu and Zen people getting along... we can also see just how incorrect our former member "Zen Monk Genryu" was when he claimed that

no Buddhist tradition accepts Nichiren

Engyo

Hello, Void -

I know Rev. Ryuei, and respect his work. Thanks for linking him in here.......

gerald_ford

I was hesitant to read the Lotus Sutra myself for a long time. I kept associating it with the SGI folks, and assumed it was a cult text, since I thought SGI was a cult too. However, one time I thumbed through Watson's translation of the Lotus Sutra and was kind of impressed. It's a really hard sutra to read because it's heavily symbolic, and uses lots of astronomical descriptions. At the same time though, I realized that the Lotus Sutra has come to define East Asian Buddhism, and so getting to know the Lotus Sutra helps one appreciate, understand the East Asian Buddhist culture alot better.

I don't feel I got a lot out of it philosophically, but as Watson said of it, there's a little something for everyone in the LS, and I feel that's true.

VoidWhereProhibited

It has been nearly two years since I posted my difficulties with the Lotus Sutra on this thread many posts back. I occasionally wonder if I should delete those difficulties as possibly being dishourable to the Sutra.

But I will leave them there, though I want to note now that what I posted then was just where I was at that time. I feel I am not at that place anymore.

For example: while I was taking the train last night I re-read the Avalokitesvara Chapter of the Lotus Sutra in my copy of D. T. Suzuki`s Manual of Zen Buddhism. I enjoyed it and now take it as truth in a more or less allegorical sense. I can understand that the Lotus Sutra is mainstream orthodox Mahayana.

So, I want to give public honour and respect to the Lotus Sutra!

However, I still prefer other Sutras such as the Diamond and Heart Prajnaparamita Sutras. And I find the longer Surangama Sutra fascinating.

KarikoPuppies

well I am not happy that those two religion abusing Lotus Sutra as their own good. If it wasn't for them, it would have been much easier to recommend Lotus Sutra. Lotus Sutra is Shakyamuni Buddha's teaching not anyone else! and Shakyamuni Buddha is the one who started the buddhism. and he said Lotus Sutra is the king of the sutras.

federica

This thread is very old.
If you wish to discuss a specific aspect of any Sutra, feel free to begin a new thread.